Centralized urgency to autonomous caution: A Q-method exploration of Dutch citizens’ energy transition visions

4Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study explores varied sociotechnical visions on the Dutch energy transition from an engaged citizen perspective, thereby moving beyond a binary of support or opposition that often dominates public and policy debates. Existing energy transition literature has primarily emphasized formal and institutionalized visions or imaginaries of incumbent actors, overlooking the viewpoints of citizens that move past this for-or-against stance. Employing Q-methodology, four sociotechnical visions are identified: the Eco-Equitable, Pragmatic Project, Centralized Urgency, and Autonomous Caution. These visions showcase the multiple dimensions on which visions are held, each reflecting their own priorities for the energy transition. The visions diverge in the assessment of the urgency of climate change mitigation and their views on implementation, whether centralized or localized, or with or without an emphasis on social justice. Ultimately, the study accentuates the necessity for nuanced, inclusive dialogues to comprehend the multifaceted nature of citizen-centric energy transitions and how they expand on institutionalized visions of desirable energy transition orders.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lammers, R., Jansma, S. R., Veldkamp, B. P., de Visser, M., & Gosselt, J. F. (2025). Centralized urgency to autonomous caution: A Q-method exploration of Dutch citizens’ energy transition visions. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 27(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2024.2445067

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free